National Congress of Parents & Teachers
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 362169155
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2014–2024
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Alexandria, VA, USA
- Phone
- 7035181200
- Rating
- 78
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Standard
- Sector
- Parent/Teacher Group
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $25,064,189
- Expenses
- $22,374,723
- Assets
- $22,225,307
- Liabilities
- $8,105,342
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
38 people listed
Executive titles in this filing
- Yvonne Johnson (President)
- William Datema (President-Elect)
- Rose Acerra (Vice President of Advocacy)
- Charles Scott (Vice President of Membership)
- Nathan Monell (Executive Director (To 04/25))
- Howard Berman (Executive Director (From 05/25))
Highest reported compensation
- Nathan Monell (Executive Director (To 04/25)): $470,512 total reported compensation
- Amy Lorenz (Deputy Executive Director): $306,448 total reported compensation
- James Thomasell (CFO): $300,658 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
PTA's mission is to make every child's potential a reality by engaging and empowering families and communities to advocate for all children. For more than 120 years, National Parent Teacher Association (National PTA) has worked toward bettering the lives of (Continued on Sch O)every child in education, health, and safety. Founded in 1897 as the National Congress of Mothers by Alice McLellan Birney and Phoebe Apperson Hearst, National PTA is a powerful voice for all children, a relevant resource for families and communities, and a strong advocate for public education. The PTA's nationwide network provides parents with the forum and tools to collectively influence the decisions that affect children not only at their schools, but also throughout their districts, within their states, and across the nation. This mission is unique to PTA.
What it reported doing in 2024
Member and Field Services: Developed and sustained programs, curriculum, and toolkits aligned with the National PTA 2021-2026 Strategic Plan to advance the important mission of the organization. Managed a year-long membership focus initiative for local PTA leaders across our network while also providing targeted support for district, council, region and state PTA leaders. Updated and maintained an online platform for people who visit the National PTA website to join PTAs across the country. Provided state and local PTA leaders with technical assistance, information, training, and support to implement programs and resources. Continued to build membership related resources that tie PTA value to membership, such as a membership initiative called Membership Mania and an online series called Membership Minute. As per the Strategic Plan, continued to look at the structure of PTA to identify initiatives and potential changes to strengthen the support provided to PTA's constituent associations.Training: Provided training for our members from experts in nonprofit management, family engagement, child advocacy, diversity and leadership. Developed and distributed a local leader PTA kit, a year-round resource to support the needs of all PTA leaders that included over 90 instructor-led trainings and webinars. Developed digital courses for more than 6000 registrants.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Donor-supported. 76% of the money available for current operations came from contributions and gifts.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 90% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
- Includes noncash contributions: Reported contributions include donated property or goods.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. The filing does not identify recipients for some grant dollars and assets have declined or grown slowly.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 77
- Transparency & Controls: 73
- Accountability: 95
- Sustainability: 50
- Growth: 80
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 74.8%; rating input score 75
- Program expense ratio: 83.3%; rating input score 83
- Fundraising efficiency: $32.28 raised per $1 spent on fundraising; rating input score 68; 68th percentile among comparable filings
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 94.1%; rating input score 94; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 4 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 67
- Compensation committee: Pass
- Independent consultant: Pass
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Pass
- Board or committee approval: Pass
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 13.3%; rating input score 13; 8th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 100%; rating input score 100; 66th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 8 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 89
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Pass
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Pass
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 10.7%; rating input score 69; 69th percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 0.99; rating input score 36; 36th percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.36; rating input score 40; 40th percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 11.1%; rating input score 16; 16th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 5.5% per year; rating input score 100; 45th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 6.2% per year; rating input score 100; 54th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: -0.9% per year; rating input score 0; 8th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- Where the money goes: 74.8% of revenue deployed · 83.3% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 22 of 22 board members independent · 8 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 5 filed program accomplishments · $18.6M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $471K · 38 people listed · 4 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $829K reported
- Consistency: 36 of 38 current checks pass · 2 findings to review
- Schedules: 9 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 11 filing years from 2014 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 32 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 23 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
- Staff and benefit plans: Retirement and health plans the organization files with the Department of Labor, and the people in them.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Grant itemization coverage scored 13/100.
- High — Growth: Asset growth scored 0/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Total-asset coverage ratio scored 36/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: Other executive compensation review process not reported.
- High — Sustainability: Officer compensation ratio scored 16/100.
- Moderate — Sustainability: Liabilities to assets ratio scored 40/100.
- Moderate — Transparency & Controls: Schedule A contributions reconciliation did not reconcile in the filed values.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.